51
51
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 51
favorite 0
quote 0
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history of marriage, the federal government has always deferred to state definitions of marriage. let me give you an example. some states allow first cousins to marry, others don't because of prohibitions, incest concerns and things like that. whatever the state definitions are, the federal government has always followed the state definition. if a state says they're married, the federal government says for the purposes of benefits they're married. in 1996, the defense of marriage act departed from that practice and said the federal gover
doma cases are slightly different. i think the doma challenge is much narrower challenge and i expect it to be much more optimistic about a kind of flat-out ruling that this is unconstitutional by the supreme court. the reason i think that, melissa, doma doesn't require any state to change its marriage laws. all it says is the federal government is going to return to what the federal government was always doing before. we were talking about federalism issues earlier in the show. in the history...
50
50
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 50
favorite 0
quote 0
the supreme court is taking up a prop 8 and a doma case. does the president need to take a stronger stance on this now? >> i think he should. both on the substance and the politics. the constitution clearly states every american has equal rights under the law. that includes the right for loving committed couples to get married. it's a no brainer. on the pollices, as you said, that 53% support, it shot up ten points in two years. america is at a tipping point on this issue. you are right about the young people. they are going to be the majority of the electorate over the next two presidential cycles. they are already a voice in a n. it's all upside for the president and the democrats. >> erin, i'm going to get you to weigh in after the break on the president's legacy on this issue. >>> and the must-reads, the picks after this. citracal slow release continuously releases calcium plus d with efficient absorption in one daily dose. citracal slow release. with efficient absorption in one daily dose. is bigger than we think ... sometimelike the f
the supreme court is taking up a prop 8 and a doma case. does the president need to take a stronger stance on this now? >> i think he should. both on the substance and the politics. the constitution clearly states every american has equal rights under the law. that includes the right for loving committed couples to get married. it's a no brainer. on the pollices, as you said, that 53% support, it shot up ten points in two years. america is at a tipping point on this issue. you are right...
63
63
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 63
favorite 0
quote 0
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin of history. the courts other gay rights case comes from california which gave gays the right to marry and then with proposition 8 took it away. taking away an existing right because of animus was prohibited by the court in a '96 decision authored by justice kennedy. but where the doma case asks can the federal government discriminate against married couple, the prop 8 case asks can states bar gays from marrying. kennedy has the opportunity to liberate california or create a gay roe v. wade. s acceptance is only growing. kennedy can only give the gay rights movement a decisive final
when the supremes get down to assessing doma, we can expect the conservatives to defend doma and the liberals to strike it down. the comp significance of the majority will be determined by the votes of chief justice roberts who has shown he's willing to leave the conservatives if he feels the court's legacy is in peril and kenne kennedy. he wrote the constitution prohibits laws singling out a certain class of citizens for disfavored legal status. it appears doma will get tossed in the dust bin...
43
43
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 43
favorite 0
quote 0
if we first talk about doma, if it is struck down, what does that mean nationally? >> well, it means only that if you live in a state that permits same-sex marriage and you are in a same-sex marriage, that the federal government will recognize your marriage. doma does not require states to do anything. it doesn't require anybody to do anything. but right now it prevents the federal government from granting recognition to same-sex marriages like, for instance, in new york. if that is struck down, the people who are married in states that allow it will get full federal recognition. >> which is over more than 1,000 federal benefits that go along with that. >> it's very important. it would be very significant. >> jonathan, we talk about prop 8 in california. if that is struck down, does that mean marriage equality then for all intents and purposes is legal in all states? does what happens in california then change the relevance for 49 other states? >> well, this all gets to how the supreme court rules. you know, i think it was the ninth circuit -- the ninth circuit cour
if we first talk about doma, if it is struck down, what does that mean nationally? >> well, it means only that if you live in a state that permits same-sex marriage and you are in a same-sex marriage, that the federal government will recognize your marriage. doma does not require states to do anything. it doesn't require anybody to do anything. but right now it prevents the federal government from granting recognition to same-sex marriages like, for instance, in new york. if that is...
71
71
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 71
favorite 0
quote 0
the doma case has a very straight forward question. is it constitutional for a federal law to say that the government will not recognize marriages even when they're legal in the states, so that if married couples get married in the nine states where it's now legal, the federal government doesn't recognize those marriages. there's a question about whether that's unconstitutional discrimination, but if the supreme court does strike down doma, it doesn't say anything about whether the states must permit same-sex marriage, it only says if they do, the federal government must recognize them. so it's the proposition 8 case from california that potentially raises the bigger question. now, as it comes to the supreme court, it comes in a very narrow way. the court of appeals, which agreed with the trial court, that proposition 8 striking down gay marriage in california was unconstitutional, it ruled in a very narrow way. it said california was wrong to grant the right and then take it away. you can't do that, apeeldz court said. if the supreme
the doma case has a very straight forward question. is it constitutional for a federal law to say that the government will not recognize marriages even when they're legal in the states, so that if married couples get married in the nine states where it's now legal, the federal government doesn't recognize those marriages. there's a question about whether that's unconstitutional discrimination, but if the supreme court does strike down doma, it doesn't say anything about whether the states must...
63
63
Dec 10, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 63
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> i've heard from the justice department on doma and not with prop 8 and makes it all the more curious. >> the justice department has, again, had a leadership position on overturning the defensive marriage act but if you take the legal position they have advocated in the defensive marriage act cases and you apply it to a situation like proposition 8, all of those anti-gay laws go by the wayside and really a question of them taking the arguments they made in one case and making them again in this other case. >> i want to read from an associated press article on the fear and hope some have regarding gay marriage. gay marriage supporters see 41 reasons to fret over the supreme court's decision to take up the case of california's man on same sex issues and nine states allow partners to marry or will soon. 41 states do not. of those, 30 have written gay marriage bans into their state's constitution. >> i'm not that worried and the reason is because i think that the supreme court would have only taken these cases if they thought that they were ripe for a decision that moves the country forwa
. >> i've heard from the justice department on doma and not with prop 8 and makes it all the more curious. >> the justice department has, again, had a leadership position on overturning the defensive marriage act but if you take the legal position they have advocated in the defensive marriage act cases and you apply it to a situation like proposition 8, all of those anti-gay laws go by the wayside and really a question of them taking the arguments they made in one case and making...
151
151
Dec 9, 2012
12/12
by
MSNBC
tv
eye 151
favorite 0
quote 1
let's start with doma. if that is struck down by the high court, thewill that be thed of conservatives' attempts of outlawing gay marriage? >> it is the mother of all federal laws to try to outlaw. it will be over it it's overturned. if social conservatives try to get smart about this stuff, looking for opportunities to play defense instead of offense, doma, which is a terrible law in my estimation, was an attempt to completely play offense. you can't do this anywhere in any state. we're going to pre-empt you before you try. i think social cons are in a much better position when they say, look, let's make it so the government can't compel us to do things privately we don't want to do. i think you'll see much more emphasis placed on that. the question will be more than what will the supreme court try to do because they don't want to be out in front of public opinion too much. it's going to be fascinating. >> and they've rarely been accused of doing that either. david, let's move on to prop 8 in california. i
let's start with doma. if that is struck down by the high court, thewill that be thed of conservatives' attempts of outlawing gay marriage? >> it is the mother of all federal laws to try to outlaw. it will be over it it's overturned. if social conservatives try to get smart about this stuff, looking for opportunities to play defense instead of offense, doma, which is a terrible law in my estimation, was an attempt to completely play offense. you can't do this anywhere in any state. we're...